# Technology vs Innate Talent **URL:** \ **Category:** In My Humble Opinion\ **Created:** [December 8, 2022, 1:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203 "2022-12-08T13:29:05Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Spice\_Weasel](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spice_weasel/32/5435_2.png) [@Spice\_Weasel](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spice_Weasel)\ **Post date:** [December 8, 2022, 9:55pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/21 "2022-12-08T21:55:55Z")
> [@Cardigan](#): > > Taking the notion that technology in the realm of entertainment will inevitably and naturally surpass human creativity to an extreme, how long will it be before AI fully replaces or eliminates the need for human artists? Good question, and one I’m invested in as a writer. Here’s an article I found about an AI that uses others’ digital art to create AI comic book art. What interested me are the wide variety of responses from human artists. > **[Comic Book Creators React To AI Artificial Intelligence Art Explosion](https://bleedingcool.com/comics/comic-book-creators-react-to-ai-artificial-intelligence-art-explosion/)** > > This weekend, the Lensa app created by Prisma AI using went viral, a service that encourages you to upload images of your face and then concocts ---
**Author:** ![Chronos](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/chronos/32/134_2.png) [@Chronos](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Chronos)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 1:52am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/22 "2022-12-09T01:52:58Z")
So they use one particular technology in their performances. They also use recording technology, so people who aren’t physically present can hear their music. And even for live performances, they use audio amplification technology, so that more people can hear them live. And neither of those is a completely passive technology: At every concert, there’s a guy at a soundboard making sure to adjust the gain on every microphone, to make the best mix of sounds possible, and I’m sure they make sure to get the best audio tech they can. And this specific group might not use instruments, like guitars and keyboards and drums, but most do, and those are a technological cheat, too. Plus, autotune is available to everyone. You could get autotune yourself, and record tracks with it. Even with it, could you produce anything near as good as Pentatonix does? Clearly, there’s still considerable skill and talent there. ---
**Author:** ![suranyi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/e36b37/32.png) [@suranyi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/suranyi)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 6:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/23 "2022-12-09T06:10:41Z")
This is a question I’ve seen come up often, and frankly it’s something I just don’t care at all about. All I care is whether the song sounds good or not. The technology used, or not used, to make it does not interest me in the slightest. ---
**Author:** ![TokyoBayer](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tokyobayer/32/13989_2.png) [@TokyoBayer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TokyoBayer)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 11:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/24 "2022-12-09T11:59:45Z")
> [@Spice\_Weasel](#): > > Good question, and one I’m invested in as a writer. Here’s an article I found about an AI that uses others’ digital art to create AI comic book art. What interested me are the wide variety of responses from human artists. One of my students wants to be a manga artist and recently discovered how good these apps are getting. She’s discouraged because it looks like it will much harder to become a professional artist. ---
**Author:** ![Jasmine](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jasmine/32/2964_2.png) [@Jasmine](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jasmine)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 12:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/25 "2022-12-09T12:53:12Z")
> [@Cardigan](#): > > She then suggested maybe they use auto-tune. I had to google to find out. The fact that, on your own, you had no idea the music was tech aided until you were told shows that the end product is just as good in every respect. When it is all said and done, it is the end product that matters. ---
**Author:** ![mbh](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/a6a055/32.png) [@mbh](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/mbh)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 1:31pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/26 "2022-12-09T13:31:36Z")
The title of this thread is “Technology vs Raw Talent”. But a performance of a professional singer is not an example of raw talent. It is raw talent, plus years of studying music theory, plus years of conditioning their lips and throats, plus years of training their ears and vocal cords, plus years of rehearsals. Sometimes I want to hear an acoustic guitar, with catgut strings, played by a folkie in a coffeehouse. Sometimes I want to hear an electric guitar, with steel strings, pickups, amplifiers, and a wah-wah pedal, played by a metal-head in a stadium. ---
**Author:** ![Cardigan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardigan/32/187_2.png) [@Cardigan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardigan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/27 "2022-12-09T14:00:26Z")
> [@mbh](#): > > a professional singer is not an example of raw talent Good point. The use of ‘raw’ in the title is inconsistent with what I’m trying to get at. ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/28 "2022-12-09T14:12:16Z")
> [@Cardigan](#): > > In it he argues that practicing an activity in any field for 10,000 hours is a prerequisite to achieve greatness. You will not be surprised to learn that the “10,000 Hour Rule” has been debunked many, many times. ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/29 "2022-12-09T14:13:18Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > You will not be surprised to learn that the “10,000 Hour Rule” has been debunked many, many times. Ah, but has it been debunked **10,000** times? ---
**Author:** ![MrDibble](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/mrdibble/32/114_2.png) [@MrDibble](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MrDibble)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:14pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/30 "2022-12-09T14:14:23Z")
That only works if everyone who debunks it spends at least an hour doing so… ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/31 "2022-12-09T14:18:17Z")
> [@Jasmine](#): > > > [@Cardigan](#): > > > > She then suggested maybe they use auto-tune. I had to google to find out. > > The fact that, on your own, you had no idea the music was tech aided until you were told shows that the end product is just as good in every respect. When it is all said and done, it is the end product that matters. I think it matters how you get there, too. There’s art in creating art. I appreciate hand-made goods in many contexts. I think autotuning voices that are almost perfect is like using a Dremel rather than sandpaper to smooth off that little bit over there. It doesn’t offend my sensibilities. But i can see how it would bother someone else. ---
**Author:** ![bump](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/b/7c8e57/32.png) [@bump](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/bump)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/32 "2022-12-09T14:28:13Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > I just ask you this one question - who is going to be more popular: the naturally pitch perfect singer with mundane lyrics and style; or the assisted pitch perfect singer with style and wit? We already saw that without autotune IMO. Popular music isn’t necessarily about technical excellence, it’s as much about attitude, look, message and style as about the actual music itself. I mean, people liked Queen as much because of the band’s songwriting ability and Freddie Mercury’s general stage/show persona as they did for his and the rest of the band’s musical prowess. Lots of other bands are competent, but not necessarily where they are because of their musical abilities, and lots of extraordinarly competent musicians and vocalists are languishing in obscurity or near-obscurity because they’re boring, or just unlucky. I feel like steroids though, are something different. They don’t add skill or refine skill, they just make it a lot easier to recover, and in the case of muscle-building, let people go beyond where their body would normally do so. To use a car racing metaphor, autotune is like some sort of driver-assistance technology that would help them keep their lane or shift at _just_ the right point for maximum power, regardless of how sloppy they are with the clutch pedal or steering wheel. Steroids are more like some kind of additive in the gas that just gives it more power. ---
**Author:** ![Cardigan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardigan/32/187_2.png) [@Cardigan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardigan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/33 "2022-12-09T14:36:54Z")
Maybe some mod can change ‘raw’ in the title to ‘innate’? ---
**Author:** ![What\_Exit](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/what_exit/32/10652_2.png) [@What\_Exit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/What_Exit)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/34 "2022-12-09T14:40:56Z")
Done. ---
**Author:** ![puzzlegal](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/puzzlegal/32/3827_2.png) [@puzzlegal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/puzzlegal)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/35 "2022-12-09T14:46:06Z")
> [@Cardigan](#): > > I suspect the Cher song you’re specifically referring to is Believe. > [Cher - Believe [Official Music Video] - YouTube ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nZXRV4MezEw) > No attempt was made to hide the use of the Auto-tune, and in fact quite the opposite was done, as it was obviously and cleverly used in that instance to create an interesting effect. No one could mistake that as being Cher’s natural voice, and that was an artistic decision. The intent was not to ‘clean up’ her voice or allow her to hit notes truer, but rather, to intentionally sound synthetic. In this context, I think the use of Auto-tune is great. I know it’s a little off topic, but i totally agree with this. In effect, Cher was given access to a new musical instrument, and was playing around to see what she could do with it. That’s what artists do, and i think the result was deservedly a huge success. I like hand made wooden objects, but i also own some 3d printed “wood”, and it’s a great substance with lots of valuable properties and i hope it gets explored and used to great effect. ---
**Author:** ![Crafter\_Man](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/crafter_man/32/458_2.png) [@Crafter\_Man](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Crafter_Man)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/36 "2022-12-09T14:49:43Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > You will not be surprised to learn that the “10,000 Hour Rule” has been debunked many, many times. Not surprising. And there are some who say that excessive practice can actually work against you. On the other end of the spectrum are artists who claim to _never_ practice, yet they’re considered great. One that comes to mind is Johnny Ramone. ---
**Author:** ![Cardigan](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cardigan/32/187_2.png) [@Cardigan](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cardigan)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 2:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/37 "2022-12-09T14:58:31Z")
> [@Crafter\_Man](#): > > On the other end of the spectrum are artists who claim to _never_ practice, yet they’re considered great. One that comes to mind is Johnny Ramone. And that Tom Waits fellow. He could really stand to take a vocal lesson or two to _refine_ his voice. And maybe some piano lessons too. 😉 [The Piano Has Been Drinking - Tom Waits - YouTube](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BPPtrqvHGEg) ---
**Author:** ![Johnny\_Bravo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/johnny_bravo/32/493_2.png) [@Johnny\_Bravo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Johnny_Bravo)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/38 "2022-12-09T15:22:26Z")
> [@Isamu](#): > > I just ask you this one question - who is going to be more popular: the naturally pitch perfect singer with mundane lyrics and style; or the assisted pitch perfect singer with style and wit? FWIW, perfect/absolute pitch isn’t that big a deal. It’s kind of overhyped in popular culture and doesn’t imply skill or even musical talent. A middling singer with perfect pitch is going sound just like a middling singer without it. ---
**Author:** ![scabpicker](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/scabpicker/32/8268_2.png) [@scabpicker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/scabpicker)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 3:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/39 "2022-12-09T15:52:31Z")
> [@puzzlegal](#): > > Cher was given access to a new musical instrument, and was playing around to see what she could do with it. Yeah, for the most part, that is my take on it. Autotune is a tool, and even when it’s used to simply correct someone’s pitch and not as an obvious effect, it’s really just a shortcut around editing the best takes together when used that way. Now, some people might be more forgiving of someone who edited together the best takes, since that takes some skill and is time consuming. I don’t really see that much difference, myself. It’s been mentioned before, but I’ll re-iterate it: Every recording you hear is somewhat a fiction. Even in the days of recording with a single microphone straight to disc, they’d record several takes and keep the best one. If nothing else, the response of the microphone will make them sound different than they did in the room. And well, those tools let you do things that humans actually cannot do. There’s about an instant of actual noises that come from an acoustic instrument in this track (a human voice). Everything else is synthesized, and the drum part is pretty much impossible for a human. (caution: lots of very rapidly flashing images) [![](https://img.youtube.com/vi/2XK_FnzVfpo/maxresdefault.jpg "Aphex Twin - 4 (HQ)") ](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2XK_FnzVfpo) ---
**Author:** ![Pitchmeister](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/pitchmeister/32/3459_2.png) [@Pitchmeister](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Pitchmeister)\ **Post date:** [December 9, 2022, 4:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203/40 "2022-12-09T16:33:47Z")
> [@Jaycat.again](#): > > I wonder if I’ve ever bought any recordings that used autotune, and I wasn’t even aware of it? Yes, you have, almost 100% certainly. As many others have stated, Autotune (or one of its many, many siblings) used with caution by a professional is imperceptible. It’s not a matter of „switching it on“ and it’ll do its thing, there’s a lot of fine-tuning (heh) involved, sometimes for every individual note. I’ve edited many vocal tracks myself, using Melodyne, and it is just one tool of many used to get the best performance. If someone without talent were to just switch on Autotune, the result would sound a lot like „Believe“. Also, you can’t Autotune emotion and vocal expression. Nobody in the world is going to make Bob Dylan (or any other technically unproficient singer) sound like Freddy Mercury. > [@Johnny\_Bravo](#): > > FWIW, perfect/absolute pitch isn’t that big a deal. It’s kind of overhyped in popular culture and doesn’t imply skill or even musical talent. A middling singer with perfect pitch is going sound just like a middling singer without it. Perfect pitch is not the same thing as „pitch perfect“. The latter means being able to play/sing perfectly in tune, whereas the former means being able to _identify_ any pitch you hear. That’s not the same as being able to sing it exactly, especially together in an ensemble with other singers. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203.md?page=1) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/technology-vs-innate-talent/976203.md?page=3)